Frequency Stability Analysis and Charging Area Expanding Optimal Design for Matrix Coupling Mechanism in Wireless Power Transfer System

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper presents the modelling and optimisation method for matrix transmitter windings and single receiver systems. The modelling and derivations are well-developed. It could be useful in particular industrial applications and inspire new ideas.

I'd suggest formatting the equations in consistent fonts (incl. sizes), and arranging figures in a better layout.

Author Response

Frequency Stability Analysis and Charging Area Expanding Optimal Design for Matrix Coupling Mechanism in WPT System

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

First, the authors would like to thank the reviewers and the editors for their efforts to review the manuscript and provide the feedback to make the presentation of this work better. The following sections include a one-to-one response to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. Major changes are highlighted in the revised manuscript.

Response:

Thank you very much for your help and advice.

The equations formatting and figures arrangement problems have been carefully checked and revised in revised version, which is highlighted.

Please see the attachment of the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper Frequency Stability Analysis and Charging 2 Area Expanding Optimal Design for Matrix 3 Coupling Mechanism in WPT System is well present. It can be accepted to publish but it need to improve the quality of English language.

The paper Frequency Stability Analysis and Charging 2 Area Expanding Optimal Design for Matrix 3 Coupling Mechanism in WPT System is well present. It can be accepted to publish but it need to improve the quality of English language.

Author Response

Frequency Stability Analysis and Charging Area Expanding Optimal Design for Matrix Coupling Mechanism in WPT System

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

First, the authors would like to thank the reviewers and the editors for their efforts to review the manuscript and provide the feedback to make the presentation of this work better. The following sections include a one-to-one response to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. Major changes are highlighted in the revised manuscript.

Response:

Thank you very much for your help and advice.

The authors have checked the grammar carefully. Some grammar mistakes are corrected and the quality of English expression is improved, which is highlighted in revised paper.

Please see the attachment of the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In this paper, a frequency stability analysis and charging area expanding optimal design for matrix coupling mechanism in the WPT system is presented.

The multi-transmitter/multi-receiver WPT has been already widely studied in the literature. In the current version, the novelty is not well highlighted, since a literature overview is missing. Anyway, the topic is interesting and after some improvements/clarification, the paper could become innovative. Following are some comments:

1. The paper requires extensive editing of the English language. Some parts are difficult to understand.

2. The literature overview is not sufficient. Optimization of multi-transmitters or multi-receivers is a well-known topic in the literature. An extensive overview should be provided for both these systems, highlighting the difference and the novelty of the proposed analysis with respect to existing studies. Examples:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2023.171340, doi: 10.1109/TMAG.2022.3145878, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3352636, doi: 10.1109/LMWC.2019.2925008.

3. The authors stated that the advantage of the multi-transmitter approach is the possibility of increasing the power rating of the systems that would be difficult to reach using just a single transmitter. It would be interesting if this advantage would be demonstrated by simulation or analytically.

4. Some analysis in terms of transmission efficiency should be included.

Extensive editing of English language required

Author Response

First, the authors would like to thank the reviewers and the editors for their efforts to review the manuscript and provide the feedback to make the presentation of this work better. The following sections include a one-to-one response to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. Major changes are highlighted in the revised manuscript.

Please see the attachment of the author's detailed reply to the review report and the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

This manuscript proposes analytical expression to the thermal and conductance inducing voltage fluctuations. However, the state-of-art and methodology description is not clear and reproductive in the present version. Based on the present version, it is not possible to recommend such an article for publication. Improvement of the manuscript in a more precise and complete way is necessary.

-The structure, focus and style of introduction is not conducted in the expected form for a scientific article .

-The notation of the mathematical formulation is not accurate and clear enough. A broad context of such a model will expand considerably the applicability of the formulation.

-Some extra description and reference to base the formulation could be good for the clarity of the manuscript.

Author Response

Frequency Stability Analysis and Charging Area Expanding Optimal Design for Matrix Coupling Mechanism in WPT System

Response to Reviewer 4 Comments

First, the authors would like to thank the reviewers and the editors for their efforts to review the manuscript and provide the feedback to make the presentation of this work better. The following sections include a one-to-one response to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. Major changes are highlighted in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer: 4

This manuscript proposes analytical expression to the thermal and conductance inducing voltage fluctuations. However, the state-of-art and methodology description is not clear and reproductive in the present version. Based on the present version, it is not possible to recommend such an article for publication. Improvement of the manuscript in a more precise and complete way is necessary.

The structure, focus and style of introduction is not conducted in the expected form for a scientific article .

Response:

Thank you very much for your help and advice.

We have made modifications and additions to the introduction for the topic of Optimization of multi-transmitters or multi-receivers.

The notation of the mathematical formulation is not accurate and clear enough. A broad context of such a model will expand considerably the applicability of the formulation.

Response:

Thank you very much for your help and advice.

We have made careful modifications to the formula derivation and parameter definition description in the paper, which is highlighted in the modified version.

Some extra description and reference to base the formulation could be good for the clarity of the manuscript.

Response:

Thank you very much for your help and advice.

Based on the previous question, at the same time, specific explanations have been provided for the references cited in the formula and the parameters of the example diagram are strictly unified and additional explanatory diagram was added to illustrate the specific symbolic content and meaning of the formula parameters.

Please see the attachment of the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

The following remarks and concerns can be expressed:

1. The words "has responded" do not make sense in the phrase "The limitations of the 28 one-to-one [...] has responded."

2. The circuit diagram shown in Figure 1 needs more description regarding its operation: the functioning rectifying bridges, the role of the components, etc.

3. Define the abbreviation "SS": "series-series".

4. The Kirchhoff voltage law (KVL) equations compactly organized in the matrix form shown in (2) do not contain all the voltages corresponding the the self-inductances, capacitors, etc. Which are the loops considered for their derivation?

5. Related to the previous remark, the impedances obtained in (3) and the output power derived in (4) do not contain the self-inductances and the capacitances of the elements shown in Figure 1.

6. Relationship (6) is called the Neumann formula and a reference should be indicated for it. The aforementioned formula is valid for closed loops circuits made from thin conducting wire. The circle notation must be placed at the middle of the integral symbol. The only reference to the Neumann formula just appears in the last section of the paper.

7. The geometry and the specific notations related to (6) and (7) must be presented to the reader under the form of a drawing. Describing complex geometrical structures simply by text may prove inefficient and confusing.

8. There are three equations not a single one in (8), as mentioned in the text (lines 121 and 122).

9. In (9) parameter γ is not defined.

10. How are defined the fitting parameters?

11. Are the expression (12) established by the authors or taken from the literature?

12. In (13) voltage u_s must be also a complex phasor. How was the formula derived? Several additional details must be provided.

13. How was (14) being derived. There is no comment on the applied method.

14. The function z defined by (17) can be mistakenly interpreted as coordinate z. Anyhow, there is no indication about how this formula was obtained.

15. The so-called "surface functions"(in fact a single one) given by (18) are/is always zero, as they/it are/is defined. Also in (18) it turns out that z is in fact a quantity having the unit of measurement power. As it is defined in (17), z  does not have the dimension of power, but A*m².

16. The significance of the term "indicator coordinate system" is not specified.

The authors must thoroughly revise the style and the grammar of the English text.

Author Response

First, the authors would like to thank the reviewers and the editors for their efforts to review the manuscript and provide the feedback to make the presentation of this work better. The following sections include a one-to-one response to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. Major changes are highlighted in the revised manuscript.

Please see the attachment of the author's detailed reply to the review report and the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

All the requested changes have been included.

Author Response

Reviewer 3

All the requested changes have been included.

Response

The authors would like to thank the reviewers and the editors again. The following sections include a one-to-one response to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. Minor changes are highlighted in the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

The paper is well written and the ideas are well established in the phrases. Some basic figures to illustrate the difference between one and two coils will clarify even more the text.

-WPT is not defined previously in the title. No abbreviation in title is necessary.

Author Response

The authors would like to thank the reviewers and the editors again. The following sections include a one-to-one response to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. Minor changes are highlighted in the revised manuscript.

Reviwer 4

The paper is well written and the ideas are well established in the phrases. Some basic figures to illustrate the difference between one and two coils will clarify even more the text.

Response:

Thank you very much for your help and advice. The basic figures to illustrate the difference between one and two coils has been provided.

-WPT is not defined previously in the title. No abbreviation in title is necessary.

Response:

Thank you very much for your help and advice. The title has been revised.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

The authors have properly addressed my concerns and remarks. As a result, the manuscript has improved significantly.

Only a couple of edits are necessary for the paper to be published. For example, to increase the size of the circuit diagram shown in Figure 1, where the loops along which KVL is applied must be marked.

There are still some typos and grammar mistakes to be corrected, like:

"Neumanns equation" - "Neumann's equation", "Moreover, Further ..." - "Moreover, further ...", etc.

Author Response

The authors would like to thank the reviewers and the editors again. The following sections include a one-to-one response to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. Minor changes are highlighted in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer 5

The authors have properly addressed my concerns and remarks. As a result, the manuscript has improved significantly.

Only a couple of edits are necessary for the paper to be published. For example, to increase the size of the circuit diagram shown in Figure 1, where the loops along which KVL is applied must be marked.

Response:

Thank you very much for your help and advice. The KVL applied loop is supplemented in Figure 1.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf